CWP- 12432- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Jatika Traders Union of India CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. for the petitioner. Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, Senior Panel Counsel and Mr. Mohit Garg, for the respondent DEEPAK SIBAL Through was put to notice as to why its no written response dated 27.12.2023 cancelled with effect from application un 2017, read with registration but the same petitioner filed an appeal which was also dismissed on 08.04.202 2. Retrospective c rejection of its revocation application and the order of the appellate authority dated 08.04.2025 dismissing the petitioner’s appeal filed against the aforesaid orders, are petition. -2026 (O&M) Sr. No.178 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP- 12432 Date of Decision : Versus Union of India and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Tarang Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, Senior Panel Counsel and Mr. Mohit Garg, Advocate, for the respondent-UOI. *** DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) Through a show cause notice dated was put to notice as to why its GST registration be not cancelled no written response was filed by the petitioner. 27.12.2023, the petitioner’s GST registration was retrospectively cancelled with effect from 22.02.2020. The petitioner application under Section 30 of the Central G read with the relevant Rules, for revocation of but the same was rejected on 21.03. petitioner filed an appeal which was also dismissed on 08.04.202 Retrospective cancellation of the rejection of its revocation application and the order of the appellate authority dated 08.04.2025 dismissing the petitioner’s appeal filed against the aforesaid orders, are the subject matter of challenge through this IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 12432-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 24.04.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, Senior Panel Counsel and dated 14.11.2023, the petitioner registration be not cancelled to which filed by the petitioner. Thereafter, through order , the petitioner’s GST registration was retrospectively The petitioner then filed an Goods and Services Tax Act revocation of cancellation of its GST 21.03.2024 against which the petitioner filed an appeal which was also dismissed on 08.04.2025. the petitioner’s GST registration, rejection of its revocation application and the order of the appellate authority dated 08.04.2025 dismissing the petitioner’s appeal filed against the subject matter of challenge through this VANDANA 2026.05.01 11:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP- 12432- 3. A perusal that though the show cause notice refers to supporting documents were attached, GST registration was sought to be cancelled conduct of Physical Verification. Such show the petitioner to notice retrospectively. 4. In the above factual position, the petitioner’s case i covered in its favour by a recent judgment of this Court dated 20.02.2026 in CWP No.16770 wherein it has been held as follows “13. Undoubtedly, there is a provision for retrospective cancellation of registration in terms of Section 29 of CGST Act, subject to the provisions as contained therein. It is apposite to note that while such power of retrospective cancellation of registra apparent that such action can be taken only upon existence of specific contingencies and that an order under Section 29(2) of CGST Act must definitely reflect the reasons for such cancellation with retrospective effect. basic, accepted and settled principle that concerned authority is enjoined upon to put the assessee to notice of the action which is intended to be taken and reasons or the premise on which such action is sought to be taken. Hon'ble th Court in ORYX Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others, 2010(13) SCC 427, has held as under: 14. grounds or premises on which action is sought to be taken. In the present matters, it was incumbent upon authorities to have put petitioners to notice about the proposal to take action against them with retro -2026 (O&M) A perusal of the show cause notice dated 14.11.2023 reveals though the show cause notice refers to supporting documents were attached, and the only reason on the basis whereof the petitioner’s GST registration was sought to be cancelled is conduct of Physical Verification. Such show to notice that the GST registration was sought retrospectively. In the above factual position, the petitioner’s case i covered in its favour by a recent judgment of this Court dated 20.02.2026 in CWP No.16770-2024- ‘M/s Bansal Casting vs. Union of India and anothe wherein it has been held as follows:- “13. Undoubtedly, there is a provision for retrospective cancellation of registration in terms of Section 29 of CGST Act, subject to the provisions as contained therein. It is apposite to note that while such power of retrospective cancellation of registration is definitely conferred, it is apparent that such action can be taken only upon existence of specific contingencies and that an order under Section 29(2) of CGST Act must definitely reflect the reasons for such cancellation with retrospective effect. basic, accepted and settled principle that concerned authority is enjoined upon to put the assessee to notice of the action which is intended to be taken and reasons or the premise on which such action is sought to be taken. Hon'ble th Court in ORYX Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others, 2010(13) SCC 427, has held as under: "24. It is well settled that a quasi authority, while acting in exercise of its statutory power must act fairly and must act with an mind while initiating a show cause proceeding. A show cause proceeding is meant to give the person proceeded against a reasonable opportunity of making his objection against the proposed charges indicated in the notice. 14. Thus a show cause notice must contain the basic grounds or premises on which action is sought to be taken. In the present matters, it was incumbent upon authorities to have put petitioners to notice about the proposal to take action against them with retrospective effect and supply or at least of the show cause notice dated 14.11.2023 reveals though the show cause notice refers to supporting documents, none only reason on the basis whereof the petitioner’s is discrepancies noticed during conduct of Physical Verification. Such show cause notice also did not put GST registration was sought to be cancelled In the above factual position, the petitioner’s case is fully covered in its favour by a recent judgment of this Court dated 20.02.2026 in M/s Bansal Casting vs. Union of India and another’ “13. Undoubtedly, there is a provision for retrospective cancellation of registration in terms of Section 29 of CGST Act, subject to the provisions as contained therein. It is apposite to note that while such power of retrospective tion is definitely conferred, it is apparent that such action can be taken only upon existence of specific contingencies and that an order under Section 29(2) of CGST Act must definitely reflect the reasons for such cancellation with retrospective effect. Furthermore, it is a basic, accepted and settled principle that concerned authority is enjoined upon to put the assessee to notice of the action which is intended to be taken and reasons or the premise on which such action is sought to be taken. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in ORYX Fisheries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others, 2010(13) SCC 427, has held as under:- "24. It is well settled that a quasi-judicial authority, while acting in exercise of its statutory power must act fairly and must act with an open mind while initiating a show cause proceeding. A show cause proceeding is meant to give the person proceeded against a reasonable opportunity of making his objection against the proposed charges indicated in the notice.” Thus a show cause notice must contain the basic grounds or premises on which action is sought to be taken. In the present matters, it was incumbent upon authorities to have put petitioners to notice about the proposal to take action spective effect and supply or at least VANDANA 2026.05.01 11:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP- 12432- mention the material on which reliance was placed. Moreover, once mentioned in show cause notice itself, that supporting documents are attached, such material should have been supplied to petitioners. 5. Learned distinguish the applicability of the (supra) to the petitioner’s case. 6. In light of the above show cause notice dated 14.11 which the petitioner’s GST registration has been order dated 21.03.2024 the appellate order dated liberty to proceed afresh 7. The petition is allowed in the above terms. April 24, 2026 vandana Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable -2026 (O&M) mention the material on which reliance was placed. Moreover, once mentioned in show cause notice itself, that supporting documents are attached, such material should have been supplied to petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to distinguish the applicability of the judgment in to the petitioner’s case. In light of the above, we have no hesitation in setting aside the show cause notice dated 14.11.2023; the order d which the petitioner’s GST registration has been order dated 21.03.2024 rejecting the petitioner’s order dated 08.04.2025. However, proceed afresh against the petitioner, in accordance with law. The petition is allowed in the above terms. (DEEPAK SIBAL JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE , 2026 ther speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No mention the material on which reliance was placed. Moreover, once mentioned in show cause notice itself, that supporting documents are attached, such material should have been (emphasis supplied) counsel for the respondents has not been able to judgment in M/s Bansal Casting’s case , we have no hesitation in setting aside the order dated 27.12.2023 through which the petitioner’s GST registration has been retrospectively cancelled; the rejecting the petitioner’s revocation application and However, the respondents are granted , in accordance with law. The petition is allowed in the above terms. DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2026.05.01 11:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document